Paul GT73 1,398 Report post Posted February 2, 2015 i'll 2nd that....ive had a straight and a bent dsd and the bent one feels better....your hand will just glide when shifting. 2 CaTaPulT and FannBlade reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted February 4, 2015 Well I have been toying with my CSW and iRacing FFB settings. I went from linear on, to off, and tested a variety of setting combinations over the last year. Just recently i had been running the following settings for about the last 6 months - FOR at 100 , Linear ON, and min force at 14 in iRacing. This helped increase the strength of the wheel at low speeds with the cars but it drowned out the subtle forces due to min force being at 14. I gave this some thought and tried the following: FOR 110, Linear ON and min force at 8 in iRacing. Take care to decrease the amount of NM of force, you will have to ensure you dont clip in the red almost at all since you are upping the FOR value by 10%. A very noticeable improvement! The subtlety is back yet the strength is amplified. I havent tried at FOR 120 and a lower min force setting, so far so good. I have started to feel the tires of the McLaren now, which I would not hardly notice at all before and it helps to keep the car stable. No kidding here, I improved my best time at Bathurst in the MP4 by 1.5 seconds with this. I'll stick to that story 2 Paul GT73 and SteveS reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul GT73 1,398 Report post Posted February 4, 2015 I followed all that except NM..is this strength seb, here's my settings right now...i'll give yours a try. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted February 4, 2015 yes Strength Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted February 4, 2015 Paul,, just sent you a friend request on iRacing. cant believe we havent connected on there yet! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul GT73 1,398 Report post Posted February 4, 2015 haven't been on much in the past year with family stuff goin on...getting back to it now...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul GT73 1,398 Report post Posted February 4, 2015 Well I have been toying with my CSW and iRacing FFB settings. I went from linear on, to off, and tested a variety of setting combinations over the last year. Just recently i had been running the following settings for about the last 6 months - FOR at 100 , Linear ON, and min force at 14 in iRacing. This helped increase the strength of the wheel at low speeds with the cars but it drowned out the subtle forces due to min force being at 14. I gave this some thought and tried the following: FOR 110, Linear ON and min force at 8 in iRacing. Take care to decrease the amount of NM of force, you will have to ensure you dont clip in the red almost at all since you are upping the FOR value by 10%. A very noticeable improvement! The subtlety is back yet the strength is amplified. I havent tried at FOR 120 and a lower min force setting, so far so good. I have started to feel the tires of the McLaren now, which I would not hardly notice at all before and it helps to keep the car stable. No kidding here, I improved my best time at Bathurst in the MP4 by 1.5 seconds with this. I'll stick to that story i feel it seb...nice one....see you in the gt3 series when i get my Irating back up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted February 4, 2015 Happy to practice together. I'll keep an eye out for you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TDH 4 Report post Posted March 25, 2015 Your transducers doesnt feel too much localized ? Why don't you try to expand them still horizontaly but in the side of your seat position ? In that way you should have a more dinstinctive stereo feeling i guess, what do you think ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted March 26, 2015 you are correct. I have thought about this and may do it once I add motion. I can still feel left and right but it could be more distinct. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UNKLE 1,429 Report post Posted March 26, 2015 If I was to move the shakers away from under the seat to the sides then I'd want to run the seat extensions mode for under the seat. I think you get good detail with the shaker under the seat for that seat of the pants feeling. I'm likely going to run both extensions and chassis mode but thinking about something a little unconventional with the two rear chassis shakers under the seat and the seat extensions shaker fitted to the back of the seat and then spread out the engine vibration across all of the seat shakers for cars where the engine is at the rear. If it doesn't feel good then I'll go with the more conventional shaker layout that won't be as aesthetically pleasing. What motion have you decided on SebJ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted March 26, 2015 I'm going to go with a DIY seat mover with traction loss. I will build it in stages. 3 UNKLE, SteveS and Kevin Jowett reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted March 26, 2015 Double post Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin Jowett 309 Report post Posted April 6, 2015 So glad to hear you'r still DIYing Seb, can't wait to see what kind of setup you do for traction loss. I really like UNKLE's idea of using both chassis & ext modes and being able to feel driveline and rear engine cars. I wish (sorta) that I still owned a CSW to try your latest settings... I could use an extra second or two! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted April 6, 2015 Kev, I'm in the early stages so I too am excited to see what I will go with myself. I am hoping to build it late summer, early fall. Too busy right now to even get started. Simvibe is better these days. If you read around, the accuforce can also shake your rig pretty well. I think you should save up for one for your net build. I hear what youre saying about that second or two, its those last couple that are so darn difficult to shave down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin Jowett 309 Report post Posted April 6, 2015 I too am a little busy to dive in completely the next few months with the move so my build will be 2 in 1, eventually turning the store bought items into a second rig. I'm very seriously considering the Accuforce or similar for the higher end build. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UNKLE 1,429 Report post Posted April 6, 2015 FYI I was informed by Berney that by around November time onwards you will be able to order an Accuforce and you'll get it within a month of ordering it, so I'm going to wait until then. A pal of mine got his last week so I'll get to see/feel what all the fuss is about 1 Kevin Jowett reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted April 6, 2015 Great news. Lines up with my buying timeline and Cv1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin Jowett 309 Report post Posted June 22, 2015 Hey Seb You mentioned using the same Dayton amps. Any chance you could show me the Cables you used for hookup? The buttkicker setups always came with all the necessary cables n wires so I'm not used to having to use my mind on this I'm thinking it's just ... speaker out to Y into 2 RCA (male ends) KJ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted June 22, 2015 Exactly right. Two of these connect to Front and Rear outputs of the soundcard (set to quadraphonic), each one leading to each amp. Then regular speaker wire from + to + and - to - on each transducer. IF in chassis mode, left speaker out to left transducer and visa versa. PS. nice to see my thread still gets read Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted June 22, 2015 FYI I was informed by Berney that by around November time onwards you will be able to order an Accuforce and you'll get it within a month of ordering it, so I'm going to wait until then. A pal of mine got his last week so I'll get to see/feel what all the fuss is about With all this talk about OSW vs AF I'm going to wait until there is a clearer choice for me before deciding. Now I'm not 100% sure, wish I could try both. Seems like in theory the stepper motor would be better at positional accuracy but somehow the servo motors are preferred by those who try them. If AF came in a more power variant option i.e. Lenzo or other, I'd be convinced especially for the SFF mode. 1 SteveS reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UNKLE 1,429 Report post Posted June 22, 2015 I wouldn't worry too much about the whole OSW vs AF, it's too easy to get sucked into all that, especially since it's not apples vs apples comparison. There's already the slip ring improvements that have come out for the AF, so I'm definitely curious to see how much Berney can unlock/improve with the AF. If there's improvement and come Nov/Dec I can order one and get it within the month then it'll be a definite purchase for me. I just know that if I went to build an OSW I'd take ages to build it and set it up, the AF I really liked the out of the box feel in iRacing and it was up and running in 5 mins. BTW I've now decided to go with these guys for motion next year - until I change my mind again http://www.prosimu-shop.com/en/ I'm going to use this T1000 motion 2 rig as a motion platform and strap my VR3 on top of it. I'm then going to use the bits and pieces left over from the T1000 rig to build a second DIY f1 style rig so I'll have some options. What I like too is that the T1000 is easily upgradable to the motion 3 version which includes traction loss. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sebj 616 Report post Posted June 22, 2015 Thats a cool unit, for $1900 EUR its not a bad price. I am still convinced by seat movers so will build one, likely before I get an AF,...ok ..hopefully Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SteveS 1,391 Report post Posted June 22, 2015 It's funny listening to the debates about stepper motors VS servo motors. In the world of CNC machining steppers motors have been used for years, but the industry trend is away from stepper motors to Servo motors. In our world of sim racing I don't think it makes a difference IF you have good software to control the stepper motor resolution. When you pay more for servo motors then you are buying more accuracy and quality in the motor. I think the accuforce uses a stepper motor because it comes in at "right" price point in the sim world. Servo motors are typical double or triple the price of a stepper. Accuracy Since the encoder on a servo motor determines the motor resolution servos have a wide range of resolutions available. Stepper motors usually have 1.8 or 0.9 degree resolution. However thanks to micro-stepping steppers can obtain higher resolutions. This is up to the software driver and not the motor. Servos offer superior resolution compared to steppers (typically 8000counts/rev vs. 2000microsteps/rev) Servos offer 100% guaranteed accuracy. Stepper motors cannot at any time guarantee their position Costs The cost for a servo motor and servo motor system is higher than that of a stepper motor system with equal power rating. This feature would have to go to stepper motors. Steppers are generally cheaper than servo motors that have the same power rating. High speed High Torque Servo motors maintain their rated torque to about 90% of their no load RPM. Stepper motors lose up to 80% of their maximum torque at 90% of their maximum RPM. Motor Life The brushes on servo motors must be replaced every 2000 hours of operation. Also encoders may need replacing. The bearing on stepper motors are the only wearing parts. That gives stepper motors a slight edge on life. Torque to Inertia Ratio Stepper motors are also capable of accelerating loads but not as well as servo motors. Stepper motors may stall and skip steps if the motor is not powerful enough. Servo motors are very capable of accelerating loads. Servos produce more torque at any speed than comparable stepper motors. This can be up to 400% more torque for equally rated motors Noise Servo motors produce very little noise. Stepper motors produce a slight hum due to the control process. However a high quality driver will decrease the noise level. Motor Simplicity Servo motors are more mechanically complex due to their internal parts and the external encoders. Stepper motors are very simple in design with no designed consumable parts. Power Consumption Servos only consume the amount of power they need to reach their commanded position, and no power at all when on target. Stepper motors use the same amount of power all the time, even when at rest. 3 Tsfc, StrongManBR and Kevin Jowett reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin Jowett 309 Report post Posted June 23, 2015 Exactly right. Two of these connect to Front and Rear outputs of the soundcard (set to quadraphonic), each one leading to each amp. Then regular speaker wire from + to + and - to - on each transducer. IF in chassis mode, left speaker out to left transducer and visa versa. PS. nice to see my thread still gets read Sure does... thanks for the info Seb! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
